(In reply to John Daggett (:jtd) from comment #1)
> I'm seeing this locally using clang. Question is why aren't the tinderboxen
> seeing the same error...
Tinderbox is using Clang on OS X for all trees apart from birch. Birch is there so we can catch things like this :-)

(In reply to Ed Morley [:edmorley] from comment #3)
> (In reply to John Daggett (:jtd) from comment #1)
> > I'm seeing this locally using clang. Question is why aren't the tinderboxen
> > seeing the same error...
>
> Tinderbox is using Clang on OS X for all trees apart from birch. Birch is
> there so we can catch things like this :-)
The question is why my local build broke using clang but the tinderbox build didn't (the faulty patch seemed to move from inbound to central with no problems). This isn't a gcc-only bug.

(In reply to John Daggett (:jtd) from comment #4)
> (In reply to Ed Morley [:edmorley] from comment #3)
> > (In reply to John Daggett (:jtd) from comment #1)
> > > I'm seeing this locally using clang. Question is why aren't the tinderboxen
> > > seeing the same error...
> >
> > Tinderbox is using Clang on OS X for all trees apart from birch. Birch is
> > there so we can catch things like this :-)
>
> The question is why my local build broke using clang but the tinderbox build
> didn't (the faulty patch seemed to move from inbound to central with no
> problems). This isn't a gcc-only bug.
What version of clang are you using? This is what we use on the Tinderbox machines: <http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/browser/config/tooltool-manifests/macosx64/clang.manifest#3>

> The question is why my local build broke using clang but the tinderbox build
> didn't (the faulty patch seemed to move from inbound to central with no
> problems). This isn't a gcc-only bug.
Locally I can reproduce the failure with clang if I revert the fix and build without -std=c++11. Were your builds done with c++11?

Note

You need to
log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.